Moonbox

It could indicate that, but then you have to look at the other outcomes (the good ones) and explain why they turned out better than him. Either he was not, in fact, the best case, or there was some other factor or dumb luck that lead to the poorest outcome. Whatever the answer, your conclusion has obvious holes in it. Basic physics are not good metaphors for socio-economic and/or mental health issues. This should go without saying.

The outcome suggests he wasn't the best case. There are people that the program actually helps and sometimes even save from addiction, so you need to explain why that is, unless you're saying it's dumb luck? These are the obvious results of increasing amounts of fentanyl and carfentanyl in the illicit drug trade. This article doesn't support your point.

That doesn't make sense. The best case scenario would be the success, rather than the failure. You're not going to be a proper judge of which cases were the most/least hopeful. You're leaping to conclusions.

It's not, because if I can find one person that the program saved, then your evidence is countered. You don't know what his situation really was - what was going on in his head, what his genetics were etc. I don't think this individual story tells us much at all. It may be clear warning sign, or it may be an unlucky outcome.

As evidence, it suggests that there are others who will similarly fail, but offers no indication of how many people it might save/help, which is the other side of the equation. This is a poor metaphor, and I hope even you know this.

Imagine not being able to see any of them, and living in a myopic clown-world where Tucker Carlson and the Iranian Republican Guard are reliable sources of news worthy of resharing here. ?

I don't really have an opinion on this one. I've never been particularly sympathetic to addicts, and it's not a subject I'm super interested in. One person's overdose, however, is not "strong evidence". No, it proves that one guy couldn't help himself. That's it. Beyond that, we're just talking about your ideology.

No, it's a poster-boy, as you say. It's something for you to point and say, "See?!" Well if you have statistics, then present that with this case. One guy is one guy. It's evidence, sure, but one example in a crisis millions are dealing with isn't telling us much.

Imagine being upset that state-owned media from a dictator state isn't allowed to promote their propaganda in Canada.

That's not strong evidence. That's "one guy". If one guy is strong evidence, then we wouldn't have so many problems legislating firearms in Canada and the US.

There isn't a lot of territorial gains yet, and the lack of air superiority IS a problem. You'd struggle to find many examples of successful maneuver warfare on open ground without air power. More problematic, however, is that the entire front is a WW1 trenchwork with hundreds of miles of minefields. Russian air power isn't impressive on its own, as evidenced by last year's advances. When targets are funneled into narrow corridors (where the mine-clearing vehicles dig lanes out for advancing columns) and are moving slowly, however, it makes things easy. The Ukrainians have shifted to much slower, more deliberate advances, and it won't be until they push 20-30 km forward that they can actually breakout anywhere (if they even can at all). Once/if they do get pas the prepared defenses, I suspect Russian forces will be in for a bad time.

No, it wasn't by "all accounts", and you "strongly disagreeing" doesn't really change that. The first 80 years of "Lemberg" was marked by an official policy of Germanization (encouraging German settlers to move into the province, closing down of Ukrainian/Polish/Ruthenian institutions/schools etc). Even when the Empire did start to liberalize (in the last decades it was around) it was still one of the poorest regions of Europe. You've wandered into a myth.

That you talk about where you prefer to get your "news" and then link Tucker Carlson is about as dumb a response as you could have possibly provided. ?

The Soviets are no longer a threat, he says, whilst its revanchist successor state just invaded its eastern european neighbor last year. ??

What do you figure I derailed here, exactly? You started talking about reality and truth, so that’s comical. I’m not the one dredging YouTube, Syrian, Iranian and Russian state media for anything I can find to support clownworld viewpoints. I’m not the one still convinced that trump won the election. ?

Truth should bother me, says the deluded MAGA clown still convincing himself “TrUMp wON tHe ELectiOn” Thanks for the laughs again!

People are always saying things aren’t as good. Criticizing poor Liberal fiscal policy is fair, but your ill informed opinions on gas prices and inflation being their fault is little more than your raging bias. Regardless, you’ve the common sense not to start a new thread about it once a week, saying essentially the exact same thing over and over, as certain others do here.

It wasn’t a happy place. It was an Imperially governed fiefdom where German aristocracy institutionally suppressed and tried to supplant Ukrainian/Polish culture. The Ukrainians and the Poles also fought each other on numerous occasions. This was a border region that changed hands many times over the centuries, and the multiculturalism was a result of that rather than it being some enlightened cosmopol. I’m not sure what random thing you read about this to stick this idea in your head, but it’s an interesting fantasy.

You believe what you want to, and you warp your reality to fit your viewpoint. That’s why you think Trump won the election. That’s why you do whatever you can to rationalize Putin’s invasion, and that’s why you scrape the bottom of the internet for garbage like Redacted and Syrian/Iranian news outlets. ?

Not only that, you but he's listing off some of the poorest countries in Europe. You may as well compare food prices in Africa to Canada while you're at it (chart shows GDP per capita).

1/5th to 1/7th as many, according to estimates. Advantage goes to the defender in urban fighting, by a long shot. Well, the people who refuse Russian passports get deported, so we really don't know who wants to be what, or where. ? As far as what Russia wants to control, vs what it does control, we only have to look at what Putin's declared he's annexed vs what he controls. Sure can, but it's easier to list what Putin isn't lying about, than what he is. That you can take the guy seriously when 16 months in he's still calling it a "special military operation" is comical, but that's how your smooth brain works. Do you believe Ukraine was about to attack Russia? The mere suggestion is retarded, but that's what Putin says and that's the garbage you're promoting here. It's understandable that censored Russian dupes don't get this in their own country, but for someone here to buy everything the man is saying so whole-heartedly is hilariously dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Well he said 20,000 Wagner soldiers died fighting for Bakhmut... That's what he said. As for incompetence, we can see how poorly the campaign has gone for what was expected to be a quick slam-dunk for Russia. Now they're throwing 60 year old tanks into battle, because most of their newer stuff are scrap heaps. Why don't you just list off the justifications for the war?

Maybe stay in Czech more. ?

Many reasons, including: -His troops were being under-supplied and used as cannon-fodder -The MoD was utterly incompetent and that they were trying to cut Wagner out and shut him down -That Putin was lying to the Russian people (Prigozhin's words) and that the war was launched under false pretenses (which everyone but Tucker Carlson and mind-warped clowns like you already knew).

Sort of, because apparently ExFlyer saying she's not his mayor is not how democracy works. You should go live in Russia with your pal Vlad.